August 19, 2010 at 1:44 pm

Transit Task Force Looks at Revenue

by Martin H. Duke

wikimedia

[UPDATE: Some P&Rs are actually owned by WSDOT, so those would require legislative authority to introduce fees. For county-owned P&Rs, the legislature doesn't have to do anything.]

[UPDATE 2: Metro spokeswoman Rochelle Ogershok points out that $50m is a rough estimate of the annual deficit, after planned cuts, in 2012. The "long term" deficit, going out to 2015, is actually $100m. Corrected below.]

At tonight’s meeting of the Regional Transit Task Force, they’ll be looking at an executive summary of Metro’s various revenue options. It’s a treasure trove of information about what Metro collects now and what else is out there. Metro’s long term 2012 budget hole, after the various efficiencies applied, is still about $50m annually.

  • There’s still 1-cent-per-$1,000 of property tax authority, unfortunately worth only about $3m.
  • Theoretically, the County could create a Transportation Benefit District and levy a vehicle license fee of up to $100 — raising $125m! — but the cities have been busily taking this authority for themselves.
  • King County can tax parking in unincorporated areas only, where of course there isn’t a whole lot of paid parking.
  • The State has a local option tax for HOV systems, which by applying an MVET or a head tax could top off the capital fund. A lot of Metro’s federal money is already restricted to capital expenditure, so it’s unlikely that this money would free up cash to spend on the operations gap.
  • Each quarter you raise fares – not listed as an option in the report – generates about $12m.

There’s then a discussion of taxes that would require legislative action to authorize. For reasons unclear to me, charging at park-and-rides is listed as requiring this, and would generate between and $850,000 and $2.3m annually. There’s a strong case Metro and ST should do this anyway at high-demand park & rides, so in my view the revenue is just a bonus.

Aside from that, my favorite proposal is eliminating one of the state’s biggest (and under-appreciated) subsidies to drivers: the sales tax exemption for gasoline. Without any special dispensation for transit, simply applying existing transit taxes to gasoline would raise $28-40m annually for Metro, patching more than half of the hole. It would generate an even larger amount for Sound Transit, which has revenue problems of its own, to say nothing of its positive impact on state and local general funds, and other strapped agencies like Community Transit. We spend a fair amount of money in this region encouraging people not to drive, and it’s senseless to simultaneously subsidize the opposite.



August 3, 2010 at 7:08 am

2010 Primary Endorsements

by Martin H. Duke

Here are STB’s endorsements for the August 17th primary election. As always, these picks are meant to reflect solely the performance and positions on issues covered by this blog, not by their broader political philosophy, progressive or otherwise.

While many state legislative races are happening this year, there are typically only a few candidates that make a real, positive difference on transit and land use. If you don’t live in the districts of these candidates, we strongly encourage you to donate or volunteer for them.

STB’s editorial board consists of Martin H. Duke and John Jensen, with valued input from the rest of the staff.

Marko Liias (21st District, Edmonds) was the champion of the transit funding bill that died in the Senate in 2010. Together with Simpson, he is one of the two best pro-transit legislators in Olympia at the moment.

Chris Reykdal (22nd District, Olympia) is unusual in not only supporting more transit  investment, but also understanding that more highways work directly  against the objectives of that investment. His relevant positions include “uphold the core values of the Growth Management Act – focus on  urban  density to avoid rural sprawl”, “adopt constitutional and  statutory changes that permit gasoline taxes  to be used more flexibly,”  and “move our focus away from increasing highway capacity and towards  more sustainable public transportation options.” That’s a slam dunk.

Jake Fey (27th  District, Tacoma) is a Tacoma City Councilmember and serves on the  Sound Transit board. Over 6 years of service in Tacoma, he has advocated  for mixed-use transit-oriented centers, Complete Streets, and the Bike/Ped Plan.  Olympia needs more representatives that understand urban land use and  transportation issues, as well as the issues facing Sound Transit. If  that weren’t enough, he’s been endorsed by 27th District resident and Sound Transit CEO Joni Earl.

Joe Fitzgibbon (34th District, West Seattle/Burien). His primary governmental experience is as legislative aide to outgoing Representative and Senatorial candidate Sharon Nelson, one of the few legislators to understand transit and land use issues. Fitzgibbon has won her endorsement. On his website he has the most explicitly pro-transit, pro-rail platform in any race: he is for extending Sound Transit’s taxing authority to accelerate an ST3 vote, the right position on the single most important issue in the legislature for rail activists. He also wants to extend taxing authority for other transit agencies.

Geoff Simpson (47th District, Covington) has for years been the most reliably good legislator. The correctness of his positions is all the more  astounding given his rural/exurban district. As a result, his seat is always under threat and he could especially use your help.

Stan Rumbaugh (Supreme Court Position 1). It’s always hard to discern judge positions due to judicial election norms, but Rumbaugh claims to be an environmentalist, and his opponent, Jim Johnson, has a horrible track record on issues important to transit advocates. With the Kemper Freeman lawsuit against East Link coming, the Supreme Court will have a big impact on the region’s future. Johnson dissented from rulings that allowed the condemnation of property for construction of the Seattle Monorail and Link. He also tried to strike down the MVET used by both ST and the SMP, and tried to enforce I-776 at the cost of impairing ST’s bonds.

Patty Murray (U.S. Senate), who as a senior member of the  Senate Appropriations Committee, is well-positioned to deliver  competitive federal transit dollars to Washington, a capability she has  frequently demonstrated. She is one of the few central figures in  getting Link built, and deserves to continue to help make our local tax  dollars go farther.

Intercity Transit Authority Proposition 1: YES. It goes without saying that we’re in favor of maintaining the current level of transit service in Thurston County by raising the sales tax rate and restoring gross revenue to previous levels.



July 31, 2010 at 8:06 am

The Transit in Surface/Transit

by Martin H. Duke

Surface/Transit Option (WSDOT)

The comment thread of this Dan Bertolet post reveals some confusion about the transit aspects of the deep-bore tunnel plan and the most recent iteration (December 2008) of surface/transit/I-5.

The Deep-Bore Tunnel Plan

  • WSDOT provides $32m in mitigation funds, allowing Metro to run some additional bus service in the corridor until construction is complete.
  • The County provides $190m in capital, plus $15m annually,  to add RapidRide and peak express bus service in the corridor; create a Burien-Delridge RapidRide line; “simplify” downtown trolley bus service, and make some transit-related street improvements, all funded by a new 1% MVET. Despite of signing a letter that vowed to “support efforts” for this revenue source, Governor Gregoire jettisons it at the first sign of trouble (three weeks later) and later goes out of her way to veto a much smaller vehicle license fee.
  • An unfunded commitment to examine the First Avenue Streetcar in the context of the Transit Master Plan.

Surface/Transit/I-5

The who-pays-for-what isn’t as well fleshed out in any document I can find*, but the spending components are:

  • $30m in construction mitigation.
  • $476m (plus $55m annually) for:

Transit improvements include more all-day service than the elevated hybrid scenario. This would include increased service on Metro’s RapidRide routes for Ballard/Uptown, Aurora Avenue and West Seattle and new RapidRide routes on Delridge Way and Lake City Way. The waterfront streetcar would be replaced with a new First Avenue line between King Street and Seattle Center. Park and rides would be expanded in Burien, White Center and Shoreline. The Rapid Trolleybus Network would be expanded with new connections such as Madison Park to Colman Dock, Queen Anne to Capitol Hill, and Beacon Hill to Capitol Hill. Moderate investment would be made in other express and local routes in Seattle.

Make of this what you will, but those are the facts.

* It is, interestingly, much easier to find info about unpopular alternatives like the Elliott Bay Bridge or retrofit than live ones like surface/transit or the rebuild. See this for one take from the 2009 Nickels campaign, a take which probably isn’t constitutional.



June 4, 2010 at 12:23 pm

Tunnel Oath

by Martin H. Duke

Gov. Christine Gregoire (wikimedia)

A brief timeline on Governor Gregoire’s promises on viaduct related issues:

1/3/2008: Gregoire promises a 2012 teardown, for safety reasons:

“It’s coming down in 2012. I’m taking it down — the middle,”…

“That’s the timeline. I’m not going to fudge on it. And if we don’t have some alternative by then, boy are we going to have a mess on our hands because it’s coming down.”

Asked if she, as governor, could trump the state’s largest city and county and unilaterally tear down a highway that carries more than 100,000 vehicles a day through the heart of Seattle, Gregoire said:

“Yeah, watch me.”

The viaduct is now to be torn down by 2016, because safety risks pale compared to the horror of having only one freeway through downtown for four years.

1/13/2009: In a press conference with Mayor Nickels and Executive Sims, Gregoire announces her support for the deep-bore tunnel plan, which includes new state-granted authority for a 1% MVET, bringing in $190m in capital funds and $15m per year for Metro.

2/2/2009: Gregoire backs away from the MVET part of the deal at the first sign of trouble in the legislature:

Legislative leaders in the state House and Senate say the proposed 1 percent motor-vehicle excise tax, or $100 yearly on a $10,000 car, would have a hard time making it through the Legislature this year.

“To the Legislature I say, separate it out from the tunnel because it doesn’t have anything to do with the tunnel,” Gregoire said at a news conference.

5/19/2009: Gregoire goes out of her way to specifically veto a legislative provision allowing Metro to levy a $20 vehicle license fee, aimed at preventing cuts to service rather than expanding it.

6/3/2010: The Governor signs a “letter of commitment” saying “We fully endorse this partnership and are each personally committed to invest the time and resources needed to ensure this program reaches a successful conclusion.”  Still no detail on who would pay for the overruns.

Mike McGinn, apparently disinclined to make empty promises, refuses to sign.



May 14, 2010 at 10:33 pm

Glossary

by Sherwin Lee

Seattle Transit Blog often uses condensed acronyms and terms that may be hard to follow for some readers not well-versed in transitspeak.  The glossary below provides definitions for common acronyms/terms you may read in the posts and comments.  Please contact us if you would like a transit/land use relevant term or acronym added to the glossary.

A B C D E F G H I K L M N O P R S T U V W

A

ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act, a national law that requires that transit facilities and vehicles be accessible and usable by people with disabilities.

Ad-hominem: to attack one’s character or motives instead of the subject matter, using emotion and not logic.  This approach of verbal abuse is not tolerated, as stated in our Comments Policy.

APC: Automatic Passenger Counting system, uses pressure mats or infrared sensors at doors of trains and buses to help compile passenger ridership estimates.

APTA: American Public Transportation Association, a national non-profit organization which advocates for public transportation throughout the United States.

APU: Auxiliary Power Unit, allows a trolley bus to detach its polls from the trolley-wires and travel away from the right-of-way designated by the wires.

ARRA: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, an economic recovery act passed in 2009 which provided stimulus funding and grants to numerous organizations and agencies, including bodies that govern transit operations.

ATP: Automatic Train Protection, a system that prevents trains from colliding with each other.

ATU: Amalgamated Transit Union, the largest labor union representing transit workers in North America.  Local 587 represents King County Metro Transit workers.

AVL: Automatic Vehicle Location, helps determine the location of a transit vehicle by either using odometer readings, satellite positioning (GPS), or other methods.

AWV: Alaskan Way Viaduct, a double-decked elevated viaduct that runs along the Seattle waterfront.  Heavily damaged by the Nisqually Earthquake in 2001, the viaduct is slated to be replaced by a controversial deep-bore tunnel.

B

BAT lane: Business Access and Transit lane, a type of bus lane located on the curbside that permits traffic to use it to access driveways or cross streets but not for through travel.

BMP: Seattle Bicycle Master Plan adopted in 2007.

BNSF: Burlington Northern Sante Fe, operates one of the largest privately-owned railroad networks in the United States.  BNSF owns the mainline tracks through which Amtrak, Sounder, and freight trains run and extracts rents from passenger rail operators.

BRT: Bus Rapid Transit, a mode of bus transit that is non-universally characterized by some or all of the following: higher-capacity vehicles, dedicated lanes, signal priority, off-board fare payment, all-door boarding, or wider stops.

BTC: Bellevue Transit Center (see Transit Center).

BTG: Bridging the Gap, a 9-year levy (2006) to fund improvements and maintenance of transportation infrastructure in the City of Seattle.

C

C40LF: New Flyer Natural Gas 40′ Low-Floor Bus (see New Flyer).

CAD: Computer-Aided Design or Computer-Aided Dispatch (transit operations).

CBD: Central Business District, typically considered the hub of commercial and financial activity within a city.  Sometimes referred to as “downtown” or “greater downtown.”

CD: Central District, a neighborhood in Seattle that is east of downtown with 23rd Avenue SE as its major thoroughfare.

Central Link: The initial segment of Sound Transit’s regional light rail network, connecting Westlake Station in Downtown Seattle to SeaTac/Airport Station (see Link).

The Counterbalance: refers to a system of hooks and weights used to assist electric streetcars up the portion of Queen Anne Ave N that’s very steep, similar to a cable car. Locals still call that area after that.

CPB/CPT: Cost Per Boarding/Cost Per Trip, the cost incurred from each passenger that rides a transit vehicle.  Calculated by dividing the operating cost of a transit mode over the number of boardings in the same period.

CPS: Convention Place Station, the northernmost station in the DSTT (see Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel) and the only one not served by Link Light Rail.

CT: Community Transit, the transit agency for Snohomish County, Washington, with the exception of the City of Everett and rural areas that are not taxed and do not receive service.

D

D-2 Roadway: A two-way exclusive roadway for HOVs and transit running in the median of I-90 from Rainier Ave S to Airport Way S. Connected to the I-90 Express Lanes and the DSTT.

D40LF(R)/D60LF: New Flyer Diesel 40′/60′ Low-Floor (Restyled) Bus (see New Flyer).

DART: Dial-A-Ride-Transit, a transit service operated by King County Metro that can deviate from its fixed route to serve customers by request.

DBT: Deep Bore Tunnel, the current plan to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a deep highway tunnel under downtown.

DDU: Driver Display Unit, the computer console used to control the radio, voice announcements (PA) and fare equipment (ORCA reader and in some cases the fare box).

DE60LF(A): New Flyer Diesel-Electric 60′ Low-Floor Bus (‘A’ indicates BRT-styled design: see New Flyer).

DEIS: Draft Environmental Impact Statement (see Environmental Impact Statement).

DEMU: Diesel Electric Multiple Unit (see Multiple Unit).

DMU: Diesel Multiple Unit (see Multiple Unit).

DOT: Department of Transportation, an agency that is a department or division of a larger municipal government.  Typically responsible for transportation planning and operations within its governed area.

DSTT: Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel, a 1.3-mile tunnel under Downtown Seattle that was originally built in 1987 to alleviate downtown bus traffic.  Four of the five stations (excluding Convention Place Station) are now served by Link Light Rail.  The tunnel is expected to be exclusive to rail by the opening of North Link, when capacity will be fully dedicated to trains.

DT: Downtown, usually the central business district of a city (see Central Business District).

E

E-3 Busway: An exclusive roadway for buses that follows the alignment of 5th Ave S. It extends the south end of the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel to S Spokane St for access to I-5.

E60LFR: New Flyer Electric 60′ Low-Floor Restyled Trolleybus (see New Flyer).

East Link: The light rail extension from Downtown Seattle to Redmond via Downtown Bellevue.  Scheduled for completion in 2021.

EIS: Environmental Impact Statement, a document required under the State Environmental Policy Act (see SEPA) that assesses potential impacts to the environment and addresses techniques and alternatives to mitigate the impacts.

EMU: Electric Multiple Unit (see Multiple Unit).

ESR/ECR: Eastside (Commuter) Rail, the rail corridor that runs through the heart of the Eastside from Renton to Snohomish (BNSF Woodinville Subdivision). Also a group that advocates commuter rail service in that corridor.

ET: Everett Transit, the transit provider for the City of Everett.

ETB: Electric Trolleybus, a type of electric bus that is powered by connecting trolley poles to two overhead wires.  Seattle is one of six remaining cities in America to use ETBs and has the third largest fleet.  King County Metro is expected to replace its fleet by 2014.

EZRA: A planned BRT line in Puyallup.  Funding is uncertain.

F

FEIS: Final Environmental Impact Statement (see Environmental Impact Statement).

FHWA: Federal Highway Administration, a division within the United States Department of Transportation that is responsible for the regulation of national highways within the U.S.

FRA: Federal Railroad Administration, a division within the United States Department of Transportation that is responsible for supporting and regulating the U.S. railroad network and corresponding rail transportation activities.

FTA: Federal Transit Administration, a division within the United States Department of Transportation that is responsible for programs that support public transit agencies nationwide.

FTP: Fare Transaction Processor, automatically processes a fare transaction when the payment is made.  More commonly referred to as an ORCA card reader.

FUD: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt; excessive focus on the uncertainties inherent in any project as a tactic to oppose it.

G

GHG: Greenhouse Gases, atmospheric gases which emit heat and are often attributed to climate change.  Often used as a metric for reducing carbon and pollutant levels.

GIS: Geographic Information System, a system that stores data in correspondence with geographic location.  Used for spatial analysis and creating maps.

GMA: Growth Management Act, a state law enacted in 1991 to govern population growth, planning, development, and infrastructure.

H

HCT: High-Capacity Transit, a non-universal term that describes a transit mode that has higher passenger capacity than other transit modes.  Often characterized contextually between modes and within modes.  For example, light rail is considered high-capacity in relation to buses, but not in relation to a grade-separated metro.

Heavy Rail: Typically refers to rail using a locomotive or a third-rail, completely grade-separated system.  Usually carries more people for higher capital expense.

HOT: High Occupancy/Toll Lanes, HOV lanes (see High Occupancy Vehicle) which are open to single-occupant vehicles upon paying a toll.

HOV: High Occupancy Vehicle, usually defined as a vehicle with two or more occupants, including transit.

HSR: High-Speed Rail, a term that characterizes passenger rail that operates at a significantly higher speed than normal rail traffic.  Specific speeds vary from region to region, but are typically in excess of 150mph.  In 2009, the Obama Administration announced a program that would set aside ARRA (see American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) funds to upgrade certain U.S. rail corridors to HSR.

I

ID: International District, a Seattle neighborhood south of Downtown and east of Pioneer Square that contains the Chinatown, Nihonmachi (Japantown), and Little Saigon enclaves.  The neighborhood is served by the IDS Station (see International District Station).

IDS: International District Station, a Link Light Rail and DSTT (see Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel) station within the International District-Chinatown neighborhood of Seattle, considered to be part of the King Street Station hub.  The station is a major inter-modal transfer point for light rail, commuter rail, and buses.

ITE: Institute of Transportation Engineers, a research, education, and professional organization which connects professionals within the transportation engineering industry.  ITE has published several traffic engineering reference books.

ITS: Intelligent Transportation System, a system that utilizes new technologies in application with transportation systems to increase efficiency and reduce issues that normally arise with conventional transportation systems.

K

KCDOT: King County Department of Transportation (see DOT).

KCM: King County Metro (see Metro).

Kinkisharyo: Manufacturer of Central Link light rail vehicles; also used to refer to the vehicles themselves.

L

Lid: a term used to describe a roof that is constructed over a freeway with the purpose of mitigating road noise, reconnecting neighborhoods, and reclaiming space above the freeway of which green space can be built or development rights can be sold off to property developers.  Also referred to as a cap.

LID: Local Improvement District, refers to a collection of property owners within a local district that agree to pay into investments which may yield long-term returns that will outweigh short-term costs.  These investments are typically limited to infrastructure systems, including sidewalks, transit lines, utilities, etc.

Link: short for Link Light Rail, official name for the Puget Sound’s light rail project.  Contains one segment from Seattle to Seatac, another in Tacoma, and more to come.

LOS: Level-of-Service, a concept used to describe the operating condition and performance of a transportation facility. Usually on a letter scale, where A is best and F is worst.

LRT: Light Rail Transit, an urban rail transit mode with rapid-transit style features that is non-universally characterized with any combination of the following: at-grade/mixed-traffic running, lower capacity and slower speeds than heavy rail metros, or electric power.  LRT differs from streetcar/trams by typically utilizing higher capacity trains and sometimes running in grade-separated guideways.

LRV: Light Rail Vehicle, a rail vehicle used in light rail transit systems.  LRVs can run as single-car trains, couplets (two-car trainsets), or multiple-car trainsets (generally up to four).  LRVs are generally built to capably run in streets and have more rapid braking capabilities than heavy rail trains (see Light Rail Transit).

M

MEHVA: Metro Employees Historical Vehicle Association, a historical organization dedicated to preserving Seattle’s vintage and heritage transit vehicles.  MEHVA often offers public rides on these vehicles.

Metro: King County Metro Transit,  also refers to its predecessor, the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, a countywide agency created in 1958 to handle regional wastewater treatment and given authority to operate transit service in 1972.  It was absorbed into King County government in 1994.  Metro can also refer to a high-capacity grade-separated rapid transit system, also often referred to as a ’subway.’

MLT: Mountlake Terrace, a city within the Seattle Metropolitan Area in Snohomish County.

MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization (see Puget Sound Regional Council), a body that is typically responsible for governing, planning, and promoting growth policies and plans within a certain area.

MT: Metro Transit (see Metro).

MU: Multiple Unit, a term that describes train vehicles that are capable of running as single units or coupled together as multiple unit trainsets.  Each unit might have a driver’s cab at either end.  Light rail vehicles typically use multiple unit configurations.

MUTCD: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, the standard governing the use of signs, pavement markings, traffic signals and other such devices found in transportation systems nationwide.

MVET: Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (also known as the car tab tax), an excise tax levied on the purchase of motor vehicles.  MVET funds are a component of the revenue stream for local transit agencies.

N

New Flyer: a manufacturer of bus vehicles based in Winnipeg, Canada.  Various transit agencies in the Puget Sound region use New Flyer models.  The bus model codes are designated as follows: letter prefix indicates propulsion system. C for compressed natural gas, D for diesel, DE for diesel-electric hybrid, E for electric.  Number indicates vehicle length in feet. Common lengths are 35, 40 (standard) and 60 feet (articulated). Letter suffixes: LF for low-floor, HF or no suffix for high floor.  Additional suffixes may include: R for restyled models and A for BRT style.

NIMBY: Not In My Backyard, a term that characterizes local opposition to a major project that may bring substantial impacts to an area.  NIMBY opposition is prevalent in the planning process of such projects.  Typically, NIMBYs accept the need for a project but seek reasons it should be placed somewhere else.

O

OBA: One Bus Away, a handy application developed by Brian Ferris that utilizes Metro Transit data and configures it in a user-friendly way to allow riders to obtain real-time arrival information for buses.

OCS: Overhead Contact/Catenary System, a component of an electrification system characterized by suspended wires used to supply electricity to a transit vehicle.

OMF: Operations and Maintenance Facility, often used to describe Central Link light rail’s maintenance base between SODO and Beacon Hill stations.

ORCA: One Regional Card for All, a fare payment system introduced in 2009 to streamline operations and costs associated with the numerous transportation agencies in the Puget Sound area.  The ORCA system uses RFID (see Radio-Frequency Identification) technology and can carry cash value in the way of an E-purse, or regional passes.

P

PB: Parsons Brinckerhoff, a large planning and engineering consulting firm based in New York.

POS: Port of Seattle, the port district that owns and manages the seaport in Seattle and Sea-Tac Airport.  Its operations are partially funded by the property tax in King County.

PP: PugetPass, a regional pass that allows travel on most area transit agencies. PugetPasses were originally swipe cards before the ORCA (see One Regional Card for All) system was implemented. They are now sold as virtual passes that can be loaded onto an ORCA card.

P&R: Park and Ride, a transit facility with automobile parking that allows transit riders to drive and park, and then take transit.  P&Rs are more common in suburban areas where automobile usage is high and connecting transit is limited.

Prop. 1: Proposition 1, refers to two ballot propositions in 2007 or 2008 which asked voters to approve taxes to implement the ST2 transit plan.  The 2007 initiative, which was defeated, also included a roads expansion plan (see Regional Transportation Improvement District).

PRT: Personal Rapid Transit, a transit mode that is characterized by small pod-like vehicles that run along a fixed guideway under an automated system.  Unlike light rail, capacity is limited to a few individuals, hence the name ‘personal.’  PRT technology has not fully matured and is often controversial in the context of large-scale urban implementation.

PSRC: Puget Sound Regional Council, the MPO (see Municipal Planning Organization) for the Puget Sound region.  PSRC develops and promotes policies that govern regional growth and planning.

PSS: Pioneer Square Station, a transit station serving the DSTT (see Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel) in the Pioneer Square neighborhood.

PT: Pierce Transit, the transit agency for Pierce County, Washington.  Does not tax or provide service to various outlying areas in the County.

R

R8A: The WSDOT project that is adding an HOV lane in each direction in the outer roadway on the I-90 bridge.  Meant to replace the center-roadway express lanes when they are used for light rail, the term comes from its designation in an early alternatives analysis.

RCW: Revised Code of Washington, the compilation of all current laws within the State of Washington.

RFA/RFZ: Ride Free Area/Zone in Downtown Seattle which allows passengers to ride without payment within a bounded area.  Local downtown businesses help cover the lost costs associated with free rides.  Those traveling outside of downtown pay upon disembarking.

RFID: Radio-Frequency Identification, a technology system that allows data incorporated into an object (via a chip or tag) to be processed by a reader in a wireless process that uses radio waves.  The ORCA card (see One Regional Card for All) uses such technology.

ROW: Right-of-Way, land that is reserved for a transportation corridor.

RPZ: Restricted Parking Zone, a zone which limits parking to residents or patrons holding a city-issued permit.  Often used to discourage hide-and-rides, where transit riders are using parking spaces typically reserved for other issues.  The City of Seattle implemented RPZ policies around Rainier Valley stations in 2009.

RR: RapidRide, a new type of stream-lined bus service operated by King County Metro expected to open in 2010.  Funded by Transit Now initiative, RapidRide will have a number of BRT-style (see Bus Rapid Transit) features to provide frequent all-day service.  RapidRide lines will be lettered ‘A’ through ‘F’.

RRFP: Regional Reduced Fare Permit, allows senior citizens age 65+ and disabled persons to pay a reduced fare to ride transit (no more than 50% of adult fare).  Good on most transit systems in Western Washington.

RTA: Regional Transit Authority (see Sound Transit).

RTID: Regional Transportation Improvement District, a tri-county agency created by the state to develop a plan to improve the regional road network and submit it to voters for approval. Inactive since its plan was rejected by voters in 2007 (see Proposition 1).

S

SDOT: Seattle Department of Transportation (see DOT).

SEPA: State Environmental Policy Act, a statute within the State of Washington RCW (see Revised Code of Washington) that creates policies and regulations over activities and projects that may incur environmental impacts.

SLU: South Lake Union, a neighborhood in Seattle south of Lake Union that is currently undergoing urban renewal.  Served by the SLU streetcar, the neighborhood is being planned as a future hub for companies and organizations based in the life sciences.

SLUT/SLUS: South Lake Union Trolley/Streetcar, a 1.3-mile streetcar line that runs from Westlake Center in Downtown Seattle to the South Lake Union neighborhood.  The official name is “South Lake Union Streetcar”, but the other acronym has stuck for obvious reasons.

SMP: Seattle Monorail Project, a now-defunct project that proposed building a single-line monorail from Ballard to West Seattle, which would have been known as the Green Line.

SOV: Single Occupant Vehicle, defined as a vehicle with a single occupant (see High Occupancy Vehicle).

SPMA: Seattle Popular Monorail Authority, a city transit agency (now defunct) charged with implementing the Seattle Monorail Project.

SR: State Route, a road or highway owned by WSDOT.

SRO: Standing-Room Only, a term that typically describes a transit vehicle with no open seats available.

ST: Sound Transit, the short name for the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, the regional agency that was formed in 1996 and commissioned to plan and implement express bus service, light rail, and commuter rail.  The Sound Transit District spans across King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties.

ST2: Sound Transit 2, the Regional Transit System Plan for Central Puget Sound, the second phase of implementing the regional transit system. The plan was approved by voters in 2008 (see Proposition 1). Commenters may use ST3 and ST4 to refer to future phases after ST2.

STB: Seattle Transit Blog, a blog about everything transit in Greater Seattle, created by transit wonks for transit wonks.

Swift: The region’s first BRT line, planned and executed by Community Transit between Everett and Aurora Village.

T

Tacoma Link: The light rail serving Downtown Tacoma, perhaps more accurately described as a streetcar.  There is serious discussion about extending this to serve Tacoma’s neighborhoods.

Talgo: a Spanish manufacturer of railway cars used worldwide including the Amtrak Cascades fleet.

TBD: Transportation Benefit District, a taxing district that funds transportation improvements and projects within that district using voter-approved local revenue sources.

TBM: Tunnel Boring Machine, a large machine with a drill-like component that has the capability of boring large tunnels.  TBMs are often used in construction of rail tunnels.

TC: Transit Center, a facility used as a hub for local transit connections.  Many suburban cities outside of Seattle have transit centers in their downtown areas.

TCC: Transportation Choices Coalition, an advocacy group that often lobbies for pro-transit legislation and ideas in Olympia and around the region.

TDM: Travel (or traffic) demand management, a term used to describe any combination of efforts or strategies aimed at reducing congestion-inducing travel demand.

TDR: Transfer of Development Rights, a growth management program in King County that gives developers rights to build more densely within urbanized areas in exchange for the preservation of rural and environmentally sensitive areas.

TIB: Tukwila/International Blvd Station, a station on the Link line.  Not to be confused with Tukwila Station, served by Sounder.

TOD: Transit-Oriented Development, any form of real estate development that is located within walking distance of a high-capacity transit station node.  TOD is often characterized by limited parking, pedestrian amenities, and mixed-use development.

Transit Wonk: Any individual that has an unusual yet enthusiastic passion of public transit activities and issues.

TSM: Traffic System Management, a term used to describe policies or strategies that actively monitor and manage traffic activities.

TSP: Transit Signal Priority, priority that is given to transit vehicles at an signaled intersection with mixed traffic.

TVM: Ticket Vending Machine, an automated machine that sells tickets or passes.  Sound Transit TVMs also issue ORCA cards.

U

UGA/UGB: Urban Growth Area, mandated by the GMA (see Growth Management Act), used to preserve rural areas from urban development by limiting the area that can be developed at urban intensities (see maps of Washington State UGAs).  Also called an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).

University Link: The next segment of light rail to open, adding two stations at Capitol Hill and Husky Stadium.  Scheduled to open in 2016.

UP/UPRR: Union Pacific Railroad, one of the two major railway companies in the State of Washington.

USDOT: United States Department of Transportation, the governing body that regulates transportation activities within the United States (see DOT).

UW: University of Washington, a major research university and the largest in the Pacific Northwest.  Its main campus is in Seattle’s University District with branch campuses in Tacoma and Bothell.

V

VMT: Vehicle Miles Traveled, a number that measures the number of miles any combination of motorists have traveled.  Often used as a reduction metric among planning agencies.

W

WS: Westlake Station, a transit station in the DSTT (see Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel) and the northern terminus of Link Light Rail. The station is considered by the City of Seattle as a transportation hub, with connections to the Seattle Center Monorail and South Lake Union Streetcar above ground.

WSDOT: Washington State Department of Transportation (see DOT ), an agency responsible for the planning and construction of major road projects, as well as ferries in Washington State.

WSF: Washington State Ferries, a division of the Washington State Department of Transportation that oversees the ferry system.  WSF has the largest fleet of ferries in the United States.



December 7, 2009 at 5:27 pm

No One Is Dragging Their Feet

by Ben Schiendelman
West Seattle Bridges

West Seattle Bridges

Will at the Slog has a piece up today that makes me angry – so angry I’m posting from Portland, where I was trying to have a nice vacation. Will is blaming Sound Transit for not having a ready-made light rail plan for a mayor who hasn’t even yet taken office when the plan doesn’t even have a scope yet!

This seems to display ignorance of a system that we’ve been working for years to help people understand.

Sound Transit gets a certain amount of money each year, from sales taxes and MVET. They write a budget based on how much they’re expecting, and publish it. Usually, there’s some wiggle room – as projects are completed, surpluses are sometimes released, and there are funds available for unexpected administrative or legal expenses.

In the past – maybe last year, or the year before – Sound Transit might have been able to take on a planning project like determining alignment for West Seattle or Ballard light rail – a $12 million study. But Sound Transit is receiving less in sales tax revenue this year than they’d budgeted for, meaning they’re looking to cut costs wherever they can, not accelerating projects. Sound Transit’s plan for ST2 shows light rail planning for these corridors to be budgeted in 2015 – and it’s been that way since the Proposition 1 election in 2008.

Furthermore, no plan – not even a scope – has been released by the mayor-elect’s office (possibly because he’s not actually the mayor yet). No plan – or again, even a scoping document – has been released by Richard Conlin’s office. As far as I’m aware, no request has been made to Sound Transit by those offices or any other for light rail planning in these corridors.

During McGinn’s campaign, I urged his staff to talk to him about making light rail to West Seattle and Ballard a priority. I’m overjoyed that he’s doing it, and I look forward to that planning taking place – but there’s nothing for Sound Transit to do here. Even if they could find a way to fund a study (and don’t hold your breath), they’d have to know what to study within some range between streetcar and subway, and have some idea of how they’re going to pay for it. The ball is in the mayor-elect’s court to figure out what he wants. The Slog’s piece today is Sound Transit bashing at its worst.

Sloggers – you know better than this.



December 3, 2009 at 2:14 pm

“Vehicle Miles Traveled” Tax Dead

by Martin H. Duke
Sen. Haugen (Senate Democrats)

Sen. Haugen (Senate Democrats)

Gas tax revenues, an important part of how we fund highways, have been declining along with fuel consumption.  Officials wondering how to plug the gap have floated the idea of “vehicle miles traveled” tax, which would basically charge you for each mile of road you use.

Andrew Austin reports that Senate Transportation Chair Mary Margaret Haugen (D-Camano Island) has declared that idea dead for now.   And that’s good news.

The point of a VMT tax is that it raises revenue while discouraging driving.  But consider:

  • A gas tax also discourages driving.
  • A gas tax encourages use of fuel-efficient vehicles
  • A gas tax requires no new bureaucracy to implement.
  • A gas tax does not require the government to track your movements with a transponder.  I’m not really into tinfoil hats but this seems unnecessarily intrusive.

It may be that the revenue isn’t adequate, but there’s a simple solution: raise the gas tax.  It may be that in the far future most vehicles won’t burn gasoline.  But I’m not holding my breath, and we can address that problem if and when it occurs.

On a related note, USDOT Secretary Ray LaHood agrees with me.  More on the meeting that spurred this comment after the jump. (more…)



October 8, 2009 at 4:37 pm

The Bomb Shelter Called Sound Transit 2

by Ben Schiendelman
Pioneer Square Station entrance - thanks to Mike Bjork

Pioneer Square Station entrance - thanks to Mike Bjork

Like the rest of our transit agencies and government bodies, Sound Transit also faces some 20% shortfall in sales tax revenue (and a hit to their MVET, as well).

Over the next 15 years, that equates to a drop of $3.1 billion in cumulative revenue for the agency. (By that time, revenue will be long stable again, it doesn’t add anything to look farther ahead.)

Today Sound Transit was kind enough to give Mike Lindblom and me a briefing on what this means for Sound Transit 2 projects, and the resulting news is pretty good: the padding Sound Transit had in ST2 is actually about the same as the revenue shortfall.

Sound Transit will be value-engineering everything to create new padding inside their shrunken revenue – they’re trying to ensure they don’t ride the edge of their budget for the next 15 years. Among other plans for cost savings, they also identified several places where expenditures that were planned to be immediate may not happen immediately – like matching funds provided if an operator wants to build something on the BNSF Eastside track. They’ve gotten unexpected grants lately, interest rates have been low, and bids have come under budget.

The big thing to take away is that Sound Transit showed us an aggressive plan that should keep ST2 projects on schedule. Given the last eight years of project delivery, I’m inclined to believe they can do it.



September 29, 2009 at 5:30 am

2010 City and County Transportation Budgets

by Martin H. Duke
Kurt Triplett

Kurt Triplett

I want to dive into these some more later, but for now, both the Seattle and King County executives have released their 2010 budget plans.  In both cases, these budgets will be overseen by a new executive.

Anyway, the City’s six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) .pdf is most interesting for the beginnings of a tunnel funding plan.  It’s not crystal-clear from the document, but  Scott Gutierrez says $600m of the $930m City responsibility is programmed, and some of it would use the same City MVET authority that Mike McGinn hopes to dedicate to building light rail.

At the County level, Kurt Triplett released his  Transportation Budget (pdf).  There are no huge surprises for anyone who read our series on Triplett’s Metro plan.

I speculated that the audit might point out some savings that could avoid some of the originally scheduled cuts.  However, the suggested audit savings were either extremely unpalatable, or positioned a few years into the future.  Thus, there was no change to the previously proposed 310,000 hours of suspensions over the next two years.  These suspensions amount to a 5% cut from a baseline of the planned service level in 2010-11, and therefore are smaller cut from the 2009 service level.  The other 4% from the Triplett plan’s headline 9% cut come in 2012 and 2013, and may be avoided thanks to audit savings.

Two other exciting tidbits:

  • $34m for a RapidRide “F” line (Burien, Tukwila Link, Southcenter, Tukwila Sounder, S. Renton P&R,  Renton TC).  (see page 33) Design work to start in 2011.  Previously planned lines are A (Pacific Hwy S), B (NE 8th St, Bellevue/Redmond), C (West Seattle), D (Ballard), and E (Aurora).  I’ll post more when I get it.
  • $5.5m to get ORCA readers for all doors on all Metro coaches (p.25), greatly speeding loading and unloading.

The next step for both budgets is to be deliberated on by the respective councils.



July 23, 2009 at 12:21 pm

Metro to Fund RapidRide with No Net Tax Increase

by John Jensen
King Count Executive Kurt Kurt Triplett announcing Metro funding increases.

King County Executive Kurt Triplett announcing Metro funding increases. Photo from West Seattle Blog.

RapidRide will be saved, announced interim King County Executive Kurt Triplett. Triplett announced plans today to use recent legislative authority to create a transit share of property taxes of 5.5 cents, while cutting other levies to make the plan tax neutral.

“This five-and-a-half cents for Metro Transit would provide 23,000 additional passenger trips a day on our most heavily used corridors during a time when overall bus ridership has jumped 20%,” the Executive said in a press release. This would amount to about $18m a year for Metro, compared with a structural deficit of about $100m a year.

The legislature granted property taxing authority of 7.5 cents per $1000 of assessed value for public transit. The legislature also allowed for enactment of an MVET, but the Governor vetoed that portion of the bill.

Funding would be used primarily to save the beleaguered RapidRide bus rapid transit network that Metro is planning to roll out over the coming years. Failing to deliver on RapidRide could have been politically infeasible given that the 2006 Transit Now! measure campaigned heavily on the idea of rapid, frequent, and fast RapidRide service servicing the fastest growing areas in King County. That measure that increased Metro’s sales tax authority by 0.1% to a maxed-out 0.9%.

The legislature mandated that a portion of the property taxing authority must be dedicated to SR-520 service. Metro is receiving millions in urban partnership funds to buy new buses for the 520 corridor, but no money from those grants fund bus service. Tolls are set to begin along span next year.

Since all of this funding will be used to fund RapidRide and SR-520 service, this additional revenue may not help avoid deep service cuts. Triplett said he will announce a plan next week that will outline the expected deep service cuts and perhaps fare increases. Last November, the King County Council approved a 50-cent fare hike that will finish phasing in next January. It’s hard to say how much more fare riders can stand to pay, particularly without some sort of hardship or poverty exemption.

Read on for more details after the jump…

(more…)



July 8, 2009 at 7:15 am

Metro Financial Policies

by Martin H. Duke
Committee Chair Dow Constantine (kuow.org)

Committee Chair Dow Constantine (kuow.org)

The last agenda item in the June 17 Regional Transit Commitee meeting was a review of Metro’s financial policies.  The report itself (.doc) was even more boring than it sounds, but there were some interesting comments and ideas from the committee afterwards.

The much-publicized $105m Revenue Fleet Replacement Sub-fund surplus could fund Metro’s deficit through the end of 2010.  Committee members seemed to latch on to that as meaning they could avoid any pain, but of course it merely postpones the day of reckoning.  Metro service volume will not recover to 2008 levels for the better part of a decade barring a permanent new source of revenue, as Chair Dow Constantine pointed out:

It is remarkable how much you can throw in, in terms of money transferred from fleet replacement, in terms of new revenues, and still not make a huge dent in the number of service hours we’re faced with potentially having to cut.

(more…)



June 12, 2009 at 8:11 am

“We need to do everything possible to get new stations built quickly.”

by Ben Schiendelman

img_4628The Stranger recently wrote about seven things they learned when they rode light rail for the first time. The last one caught my eye – we need to speed this up.

There’s a big shrug from Sound Transit about accelerating University Link or Northgate – we can’t do much without immediate infusions of hundreds of millions of dollars, and I keep hearing they’re already working on a Northgate acceleration plan. But we can definitely do something about ST2’s other components. We could speed up Lynnwood, Federal Way, or Redmond extensions with more cash in the next few years, and we could accelerate planning for a new line in the city. This is why we’re starting to try to talk about new funding sources.

At the national level, there’s not much. There’s pressure on the Federal Transit Administration to improve their New Starts grant process, but we’re all here in Seattle, where it’s tough to have an impact in DC. It makes more sense to me to fight for new funding at the local level – we’re going to have to go to the state, and that’s a tough task on its own.

The options that stuck out for me are the basics:

  • State or local MVET using a smarter approach than the tables the state used to use.
  • Local option property taxes, both at a city level and through LIDs.

Were there other obvious funding sources I missed? I know there are lots of other options, but these seem like they’d be the easiest. Sound Transit already collects some MVET for Sound Move, but they won’t be able to continue using that revenue after the bonds are repaid, probably around 2023. Would that be a good place to start? How about allowing local voters to double it?



June 7, 2009 at 3:53 pm

Thoughts on Transit Funding

by Ben Schiendelman

With Transit Now and Sound Transit 2, both Metro and Sound Transit have capped out what sales tax they’re allowed to ask for – when we extend light rail again, we’re going to need a new source of income to pay for it. There are lots of options: A new MVET, tolls, part of the gas tax, a carbon tax, even a property tax. None of these are available unless authorized by the state legislature.

This won’t just be a matter of asking nicely. The Governor vetoed the option of a local vehicle license fee for transit. Chair and Vice-Chair of Senate Transportation, Senators Mary Margaret Haugen and Chris Marr, respectively, sent this letter (link removed due to a technical issue, email us if you want it) to the Governor requesting the veto. Essentially, the chairs would like local option taxes to be on the table for other “transportation modes” – like, say, highways.

The state has had little will to increase gas tax past the 2005 9.5c package, and with driving down, they’re left with a huge backlog of underfunded highway projects. They’re looking increasingly to local government to fill some of those gaps – local government that lost access to the MVET a decade ago.

This is a multi-decade trend. Transportation project funding has been shifting from primarily federal to primarily state, and now local – I can only speculate as to why, but the recent RTID package was another manifestation of the larger government failing to build the political will to fund projects, and passing the buck down to the local level. I think this letter, and the Governor’s action, is another sign that we’ll be asked to fund highways locally once again.

The problem, of course, is that at the local level and the state level, we seem to have different aims. Voters in the city want to build mass transit and increasingly a streetcar network, and want relief for overcrowded buses. Sidewalks are getting wider, excess parking is frowned upon, density in the city is slowly going up.

The state hasn’t caught up to this thinking. There is still a belief in Olympia that a wider highway will decrease congestion – there’s still a belief that congestion is something you can decrease! So several billion goes into infrastructure for cars, and virtually nothing goes into infrastructure for people.

So what do we want the next state budget to look like? What funding options do we want to build our next rail line in the city? And how do we get there? If enough of us start talking to our legislators, we can make it clear that our next transportation budget needs to look very different, but what is it that we want to say?



June 5, 2009 at 12:02 pm

News Roundup: 42 Days

by Martin H. Duke
By the Author

By the Author

The 42 and 42X are the two routes, along with the 194, that most closely duplicate Central Link. The 42X will be eliminated and the 42 will be dramatically scaled back in route length, service headways, and service span.

The 42 is basically being retained as a shuttle for the Asian Counseling and Referral Service (ACRS) so that they have a door-to-door connection to downtown. They cared enough about transit access to send a bunch of people to the County Council meeting to demand their very special bus line, but not enough to design their brand-new building so that it actually faced the light rail station, or even the nearest bus stop.  It has plenty of parking, though.

[UPDATE: Tipper Carl points out that ACRS is so transit-oriented that on the very same webpage, it says to find out about bus service to the Bellevue location by calling Community Transit.  Heh.]

The 42 is also infamous as the route where, until recently, you could get your next hit of crack.  Even more infamously, it’s a route I take almost every day.  Elsewhere in the world:

  • Joe Biden says intercity rail funds are on the way.  Checks should go out by the end of the summer. (H/T: Gordon)
  • In other Biden news, he and Sec. LaHood met Wednesday with selected State Governors and transportation officials.  Washington was not on the list.
  • STB Hero Geoff Simpson (D-Covington) is upset at the Governor’s veto of the MVET authorization.
  • The Rail Passenger Association of California and Nevada is concerned that deteriorating rolling stock could force a halt to many Southern and Western Amtrak routes.  As Cascades has its own trainsets, it ought not to be affected. (H/T: Lloyd)
  • Transit planners ask Congress to fix New Starts Funding, since FTA rules routinely force agencies to lowball ridership estimates.  For all the doubters, those rules were used to generate Link ridership estimates.


May 8, 2009 at 5:52 pm

70 Days, And Something Worth Noting

by Ben Schiendelman

Link Light Rail vehicles are 70% low floor. All four of the doors on each side are at the same level as the platform, only a short portion at each end is raised. This means there will be no waiting for wheelchairs to board, as they can roll right on, and no trouble for those who have difficulty climbing steps.

Ten weeks left!

I also want to make a comment about SB 5433 – the bill that modifies local option taxes this year. Just to recap, it allows for two new things: Cities and counties can now ask the public to vote for a congestion charge on car tabs to fund transit, although unlike the MVET this would be flat, rather than based on the value of the car. The bill also changes property tax rules.

Right now, without this bill, the King County Council can vote, without the public, to increase property taxes for ferries from today’s $0.075/$1000 to a total of $0.75/$1000. 5433 makes two changes – it reduces the total allowance  to $0.15/$1000, and it reserves the currently uncollected $0.075/$1000 for transit.

The Governor hasn’t signed this bill yet, and openly anti-Sound Transit Joe Turner has some incorrect reporting on the matter. He claims this is a new tax. Taxes are clearly not his motivation – this reduces the amount of tax the County Council can impose. This would be a good time to call or email the Governor’s office in support of SB 5433, as it will take a big bite out of King County Metro’s shortfall – and save routes we use.



April 21, 2009 at 10:38 am

Action Item: Getting Transit Revenue Options

by Ben Schiendelman

With about five days to go before the end of the legislative session, there’s plenty more we can do to help.

Since the loss of the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET), many transit agencies have hurt for revenue – and today that hurt is double due to huge falls in sales tax. This year we may have two new options, but only if we tell our legislators we want them!

The first is a transportation benefit district, that would allow transit agencies and municipalities to ask for (yes, ask, this would require a public vote) a $20 car tab – not based on value, just flat. The second would allow King County to use some of our existing ferry district revenue, which is much higher than our ferry needs, for transit. This would fill $30 million of Metro’s $100 million budget hole.

In the House, Representative Simpson was able to add an amendment (PDF) to SB 5433 (“Modifying provisions of local option taxes”) to do these things, but the Senate did not concur. This is normal, it just means that the bill has to go into conference committee.

As this would greatly benefit King County, I’m hoping to see Senator Jarrett take a supportive position on the bill as passed by the House.

This would also be a great time to take a moment to call your legislators to support these tools to prevent transit service cuts! Here’s the District Finder tool, as well as the legislative hotline, 1-800-562-6000 (8am-8pm).



April 21, 2009 at 12:32 am

Taxing Cars

by Andrew Smith

This is slightly outside the realm of transit, but is definitely transportation related. As you probably already know, in the US we drive very large cars that use a lot of fuel. Venturing outside of the North America, one of the first things you might notice about cars is how few very large SUVs you see and how many more very small, so-called “mini-cars” you see. A variety of taxes on cars and fuel encourage large vehicles while discouraging smaller ones in the United States, at a cost of pollution and a massive send off of American treasure to oil exporting nations. With the US auto industry effectively in Federal receivership, it’s the best possible time for reform of our auto industry, and the laws that give incentive to large vehicles

Below the fold I’ll mention three ways the government could encourage lower fuel consumption or encourage smaller vehicles.

(more…)



April 13, 2009 at 10:38 pm

I-90 Move Just the Latest

by Andrew Smith
Capitol Lake

State Capitol Building, Olympia

So State House Speaker Frank Chopp may want to take a billion or two from Sound Transit. What’s new? The legislature has been going after Sound Transit money for years now, and this is just the latest attempt in a long line of attempts. I’ve been writing about the state’s transportation funding troubles for two years now, and much of this story will be familiar to long-time readers. Whole history (as I see it) below the fold.

(more…)



March 19, 2009 at 4:43 pm

Sound Transit Reports $2.1 Billion Gap for ST2

by John Jensen

New sales tax forecasting from Sound Transit has indicated that their $17.8 billion transit expansion project passed by voters last fall now faces a $2.1 billion funding gap because of the deepening recession. Sound Transit is funded by a 0.4% sales tax (increaseing to 0.9% on April 1st) and an MVET on car purchases. Consumer spending and car purchases fell significantly as America entered into its worst recession in recent memory.

Sound Transit says that it has been conservative in its budgeting and may be able to make up some money with a variety of tools “including cost and scope control, taking advantage of the lower borrowing costs, and a more positive bid environment for our construction projects.” Earlier this year a contract was awarded for light rail to the U District that fell 34% below ST’s estimates. The poor economy has also dampened the effects of inflation that had been built into ST cost estimates.

Sound Transit is not currently planning on any changes to the construction plans but awknowledged that if revenues continue to fall and the recession deepens they may have to “also look at budget reductions, schedule adjustments, and increased bonding.” Pete Rogness, an ST staff member briefing the Sound Transit Board Finance Committee, said that delaying construction or implementation of some of the projects was “very much a last resort.”

It’s a shame to see something we all worked so hard to pass immediately be affected by the recession, but it’s also not surprising. Every level of government that depends on taxing revenues is seeing major drops in their collections. The ST2 plan creates about 69,000 jobs across all sectors — which is reason enough to keep things on track. Thus, an increased federal role in transportation spending would be even more useful in an environment like this.

The Seattle PI has more coverage.



March 3, 2009 at 12:40 am

Taxing Authority for Transportation Agencies

by Andrew Smith
At capacity

Metro Buses Queued in the Tunnel, Photo by Oran

One of the topics current King County Council Member Larry Phillips discussed in the Q&A that we had with him last week at our meet-up was the possibility of finding future funding sources for King County’s Metro. Metro, like many other state and local agencies, faces a massive budget crisis and may be forced to cut service in order to make up the future revenue deficit. Metro is without any way to raise new money: Metro, along with Snohomish’s Community Transit has currently reached its state-allowed limit on its taxing authority: nine-tenths of one percent sales tax collection. Even if the people of King County wanted to tax themselves to provide more bus service, state law wouldn’t allow them to.

At first it seems bizarre that Olympia wouldn’t allow voters to tax themselves to provide more bus service, but it makes a little sense when you think about it. Until very recently, no transit agency had reached the nine-tenths of a percent allocation, and before I-695 passed in 1999, these agencies were allowed to collect the motor vehicle excise tax (MVET). And it’s only now that any transit agency has faced a potential service cut.

Phillips mentioned two additional funding sources Metro could potentially go after if the state allowed. The first is the MVET that Ron Sims was pushing around the time the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement tunnel plan was announced. The second option would be to allow some or all of the taxing authority given to county ferry districts – a property tax of 75¢ per $1000 assessed value – to be used for transit by the voter’s approval. The MVET has been a wildly unpopular tax, and attempting to use that for transit might be a disaster, but the property tax seems reasonable.

Currently the King County Ferry District collects 5.5¢ per $1000 assessed value, worth a little more  more than $18 million a year for King County, and it looks like the Ferry District in King County couldn’t ever need the entire 75¢. There are counties where ferries are crucial transportation connections, such as Island County, where state Senate Transportation Chair Mary Margarett Haugen (D-Camano Island) lives, and they may use the whole allotment. But doesn’t it make sense for the state to allow counties to use that 75¢ taxing authority on any transportation project they need? King County may not want a lot of ferries, but the voters may decide they could use more roads, buses or rail. The ability to implement a levy to build a specific project or pass a permanent tax increase to fund transit service seems like something the voters should have the right to do. Fortunately there is a bill going through Olympia right now that would enable exactly this: letting the county use some of the ferry taxing authority for transit.

The transportation leaders in Olympia, Rep. Judy Clibborn (D-Mercer Island) and Sen Haugen among others, have made it very clear that they expect the Greater Seattle area and it’s outlying communities to fund their own transportation improvements. The state relies nearly entirely on gas tax revenue to fund roads proejcts, and with people driving less, choosing more efficient cars and taking transit more, the revenues are far short of paying for all the needs across the state. That’s one of the main reasons why they pushed RTID, the now-defunct regional roads agency, so heavily and why they are fighting for “governance reform”, also known as stealing transit money to pay for roads. If Olympia expects Seattle and its neighbors to solve their own transportation problems, it needs to stop trying to push their preferred plans down onto us. I would have hoped in light of Prop. 1 first failing by a large margin with roads and transit and then passing by an even larger margin with just transit, Olympia would realize the voters here don’t agree with their vision of what our region’s transportation system should look like. Instead, they ought to provide tools to the local governments here, and allow the voters to approve the transportation plans that they want in their own communities. The 75¢ per $1000 property tax set aside for ferries seems like great tool for this purpose.



Older Posts »